Standing firm

There are two key indicators today in the brewing battle between the House and the administration over health care reform, and while they don’t represent any kind of change in position, they indicate progressives are holding their ground.

Earlier today, Greg Sargent reported that House progressives sent a letter to the White House stating that they will not support a bill lacking a so-called public option, and demanding a meeting with President Barack Obama.

Late this afternoon, TPM quotes a statement from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as saying that a bill without the public option will not pass the House.

While progressives and the Speaker are reiterating already stated positions, it’s an encouraging sign that the right-wing clown shows (and one left wing finger-biter) have not changed the basic fact that there are more progressives than Blue Dogs, and there are far more Democrats than Republicans in the House.

So while the traditional media (and we bloggers) have duly watched, been outraged, been disgusted and been doubled over in laughter at different times by the circus, it’s worth noting that the House, the most representative body, is poised to actually represent the interests of all Americans, absurd lies about death panels, the 10th Amendment and so on notwithstanding.

Yes, nothing is perfect, but millions of Americans voted in November 2008, and the Democratic Party was handed the majority in Congress and the White House. Extremists who claim some special exemption from the results of elections, making up bizarre theories to suite their own purposes, need to be eyed with suspicion. If a health care plan finally emerges, there will be another set of elections only 14 months from now, and the people will get to vote again. That’s how it works. Elections have consequences, as the Bushites reminded us so frequently.

We are talking about figuring out a way to help our fellow citizens, people. Nobody from the government will show up at people’s houses unannounced to administer prostate exams, indoctrinate children or whatever other nonsensical (and excessively paranoid) claims have been made. Frankly, the fact the right wing puke funnel insists on regurgitating all manner of idiotic bullshit only shows how little love they have for real democracy. It’s all about democracy with them, until they lose a couple of elections, then they unleash the crazy in hopes of intimidating Democrats into backing down.

If people wish to object to certain ideas, like mandates, great. I have qualms about that myself. But the impotent rage of the right has contributed little of value, unless you’re the CEO of a private insurance company.

And then there’s the Senate. Ah, the Senate. There’s talk of using the relatively arcane reconciliation process to pass a bill without 60 votes, but it would smack of a parliamentary trick, which it would be. Not that righties will ever concede one inch no matter how legislation is passed, but they might be able to make the case to others that Democrats did something underhanded.

It’s become nearly conventional wisdom that one needs 60 votes to pass a bill, but this is because nobody ever calls anyone’s bluff on the filibuster. Frankly it is about time that somebody is actually forced to filibuster, it would be political theater on a grand stage.

Cable tee-vee news needs programming anyhow, and since trying to provide health insurance coverage to all Americans has now been portrayed by opponents as being like the Alamo, Pearl Harbor and Armageddon at once, it might be good for the American people to be exposed to the fine minds that would engage in a filibuster.

The obstructionism, obfuscation and dissembling that would be on display is hard to envision, but you can bet it would be both mighty in its rage and absurd in the extreme. For once Democrats need to dare the GOP to put itself on full and unfiltered display before the American people, and let folks compare the ideas of the two parties.

Share:

Related

Comments

I like the idea of the gunfighter walking down Main Street at high noon, daring the loudmouth who thinks he’s a badass to draw on him. The only question is whether we’ve got a gunfighter. Besides me, I mean, because I’m not in the Senate.

“We are talking about figuring out a way to help our fellow citizens, people.”

Don’t overlook that we’re also trying to help ourselves and, yes, our idiotic wingnut friends who are too shortsighted to grasp that employer-provided health care is collapsing and its collapse will affect them, too.

Republicans love “democracy” when it’s nothing more than a slogan they can use to cover for the looting of the American treasury to enrich their political buddies in a country 8000 miles way, but when it results in their guys being thrown out on their fat white hypocritical faux-“Christian” butts by a bunch of Democrats who want (gasp!) to provide health insurance to all Americans, suddenly democracy is the gateway drug to Satan/Hitler/Stalin/Castro.

Democracy meant that you lose, motherfuckers, for the last four years and I’m pretty damn sure again in 2010. Suck. On. Democracy. Yeah, that’s what it tastes like. Take it all, bitch!

Regarding the finger-biting incident, a local TV news report says the rightwinger threw the first punch, the men then grappled, and the attacker got the tip of a finger bit off in the struggle.

The victim of the initial assault was described as a “short man,” so he probably was getting the worst of it. It might have been accidental — it’s easy to visualize the attacker clawing at the victim’s face and maybe his pinky got between the victim’s teeth and then the victim gritted his teeth when the rightwinger gouged him in the eyes, or something like that.

No doubt the rightwing noise machine will milk this. When they do, remember who started it. The rightwinger sucker-punched the other guy in the nose. It seems to me 65 years old is a bit too old to be punching strangers in the face, but in any case, people who start fights should expect to find themselves in a fight. It’s hard for me to have much sympathy for him.

In other news, Republicans are complaining about a planned presidential address to the nation’s schoolchildren in which the President will urge the kids to stay in school and get an education. Republicans are calling the speech “socialist propaganda.”

That’s not surprising. We already know Republicans are for ignorance and against education.

@ 6 – Only a fucking spineless cunt and or a liberal would bite someone’s appendage off in a melee. You would think being a dumbass rodent could relate to losing a body part (with the popularity of “rabbits feet” back in the 1970’s-80’s), but then again, we’re talking Roger here so all bets are off.

Re: the healthcare debacle formally known as HR 3200: The American public is tired of an incoherent president trying to sell an asinine bill written by A) Legislators that can’t explain what is in the bill, let alone B) admit they’ve read the entire bill they’re suggesting the American people accept hook, line and sinker. No thanks, you dumbfucks (and yes, Congressman Conyers is a certified dumbfuck) need to scramble to put out a coherent message or get booted in the head again in your haste to pass bad legislation.

One thing that is telling is that the dumbass in the oval office is going to talk to the captive audience of children on Tuesday to try to sell his “healthcare reform” to their parents. What a fucking collossal fucktard…Much like the preying salesman that will bilk the old folks out of their life savings in an effort to scrape a buck, so too will the gutless POTUS push his agenda to a bunch of mush-brained adolescents that don’t know they’re being mind fucked….(wait, that was his largest voting block this past november only 10 years older). Obama can’t fool the American public any longer so he’ll use the alinsky tactics to try and triangulate for the future.

If someone punched me in the face (as described by the AP), I would certainly bite their fucking finger off if said stupid finger were in my face.

BTW, ESO @6:

You seem to think that your incoherent ad hominem rap against HR 3200 constitutes a serious critique. Um, wrong. Tell us specifically, with reference to specific sections of the bill (and without citing in their entirety someone else’s thoughts about it), your objections to actual provisions of the bill, then discuss like a human fucking being the rebuttal to your objections. THEN we will think that there is rational objection, but otherwise, you’re just a bunch one of the know-nothing Birchers. Get it?

I too have wondered why nobody ever calls bluff on the filibuster threat. I remember the days when senators did actually filibuster, speak until they collapsed — reading the phonebook, the bible, anything they could to continue “debate”. And when the inevitable came and the stunt ended, the vote was taken, with only 51 votes required to pass.

Nowdays, these weanies just move to a cloture vote automatically and when they lose (don’t get 60 votes) the issue dies.

First of all, I didn’t post @ 6 so you’re compass is already fucked…no surprise there.

Second, It is up to Congress and the President to expalin HR 3200 to the American public in a coherent manner. Are you suggesting they’ve done this? If, in your opinion they have, please explain the general backlash against this bill (save the “Faux news” rant for someone that heard that tired and lame excuse already). Explain why Congressman Conyers asked “why should I read the bill?” This fucktard can’t read the bill without “two lawyers present” even though he’s the chairman of the house Judiciary committee.

Much like in a courtroom, it’s not up to the defense to prove your case, it’s up to the prosecution (you to prove it to us)….and the more the American public hear a bunch of dumb fucks appear before them that don’t know what the fuck they’re even talking about or what is actually being put forth in a bill, like a jury, they tune out altogether.

My advice? quit whining to me and write the whitehouse and have someone with a fucking clue appear before the American people to sell it. Good luck with that.

(B) developing measures of rates of readmission for individuals treated by physicians; 9 (C) applying a payment reduction for physicians who treat the patient during the initial admission that results in a readmission; and 12 (D) methods for attributing payments or payment reductions to the appropriate physician or physicians.

Again if a doctor isn’t right the first time he loses! So doesn’t this mean more expenditures for potentially worthless tests?

(B) PROHIBITION ON PHYSICIAN OWNERSHIP OR INVESTMENT.—The percentage of the total value of the ownership or investment interests held in the hospital, or in an entity whose assets include the hospital, by physician owners or investors in the aggregate does not exceed such percentage as of the date of enactment of this subsection.

Wow now you are prohibited in future investments in medical facilities.

Then notice just below, the participating hospital can’t expand in lines 21-25.

Interesting… A hospital can no longer invest in itself to expand and improve.

PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATION.—One monthly payment to a community-based or State-based organization.

So who dey gonna pay? ACORN? That’s an Dummocraptic approved community based organization. Or one of Bill Ayers favrit groups? How about Dr Jeremiah Wright’s church? Then continue reading the next page Daddy Love. The Secretary decides who qualifies? Interesting…

@21 No, it means rewarding physicians for results instead of number of tests or procedures performed, which is how virtually every private company in the U.S. economy pays its people. Why are you against that? What are you, a fucking communist?

Hey Puddy, you are aware that HR3200 hasn’t made it out of committee and is one of several possible bills (or a reconciliation of all) that may make it to the house floor? Oh, right, you never studied your civics.

But again, for laughs…

You can quote 3 lines of a 1,000 page bill and try to prove a point (see page 472, lines 14-17.)

Funny how you quote section (i) in a list of how payment can be made and ignore the rest. The whole section begins on page 472 and details “Qualifications for Community-Based Medical Homes” (Laymens terms, assisted living facilities.) The section you quote refers to the fact that if covered individual has qualified inder a very long list of specific medical requirements (last time I checked, ACORN didn’t run any hospitals but I suppose they could diversify, hee, hee, diversify, I made a funny) THEN they will be paid “Per Beneficiary per month…by payment to community-based organization (sec i) …OR… Payment to primary or priciple care practice (sec ii).

I’ll break it down for you since you obviously only cherry pick two sentences. If you are sick and covered, the plan will pay either your nursing home or your hospital or your primary care physician (hey, patient’s choice on that) in one lump sum for all services once monthly.

OMG. Holy Crap. The bill says doctors, hospitals and nursing homes are going to have to bill on a net 30 day basis like almost the entire business world. WHY THAT’S OUTRAGEUOS. Get the guns Millie, we’re revolting!!!

Puddy, sitll an idiot who thinks he knows something. READ THE WHOLE SECTION OF THE BILL JACKASS.

I’m guessing I could go through all the drivel you’ve posted here and similarly prove that you’ve only read (or quoted from WorldNet or Rushbo) a couple lines that don’t mean what you think they mean. But it’s late and I’m off to bed.

Dallas Republican Rep. Jeb Hensarling, a leading House conservative, said he expects the speech to amount to “your basic public service announcement,” which is what the White House also promises. And he would have no problem letting his second-grader see it.

Still, he said, the White House should have realized the public would be looking for “even a scintilla of a partisan message,” given the climate in Washington.

“I don’t believe he would abuse the privilege any more than I would when I’m invited to speak at an elementary school or high school,” Hensarling said. But “there could have been a little sensitivity in the midst of this heightened battle. … I understand the reaction, given the context.”

(BTW: If you really believe it is a free country, then what’s with all this about socialism, communism, fascism, nazism, dictatorship, monarchy, and theocracy [you know, “the messiah” and all that hogwash] that you wingdings keep talking about?)

Hey Darryl, post #29 is after the whitey house took out the words for students “write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president.” The whitey house also asked teachers to engage in discussions on what “the president wants us to do.”

The whitey house later suggested the students should “write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals.”

Ahhh yes Darryl, you seem to forget your bestus friend headless lucy called us on the right Nazis, Fascists, etc. long ago on HA Libtardos. Strangely your mouth and fingers were quiet during headless’ more “lucid” periods on this blog.

It seems you’ve been brainwashed unduly influenced by reading stuff through shit wingnut-colored glasses. The event is non-political, and follows a long tradition of Presidents using their position to inspire youth to achieve their greatest potential.

LOL, Puddy. You remind me of one of the funniest scenes in A Fish Called Wanda (suitably modified):

Puddybud: Don’t call me stupid.

Darryl: Oh, right, to call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people. I’ve worn beer hats with higher IQs. I’ve known sheep that could outwit you, but you think you’re an intellectual don’t you, ape?

“Ahhh yes Darryl, you seem to forget your bestus friend headless lucy called us on the right Nazis, Fascists, etc.”

I was probably busy calling some wingnut a nazi.

“Strangely your mouth and fingers were quiet during headless’ more “lucid” periods on this blog.”

That’s because I have no problem using words like fascism and nazism when they actually apply. Words aren’t sacred or forbidden to me. They simply carry some common meaning that, when used honestly, conveys a meaning.

When Bush served up lies to work the American people into a frenzy to invade a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us, that was scarcely different from what Adolph Hitler did. When Dick Cheney tries to justify torturing people, that seems indistinguishable from the justifications that Adolf Eichman felt he had. But I digress.

What I was wondering about from you is what is all this caterwauling about Obama being socialist, communist, fascist, nazi, a dictatorship, etc. coming from the wingnutosphere when you just professed that it is a free country???

Puddy, scanning a long text, finding something short, misreading it, and attacking the whole text on that basis is the sort of thing that used to get you flunked in freshman English classes. These days, though, there’s been grade inflation…

Roger Rabbit, #7: the preliminary reports don’t sound good, but this is the media…

So what Pelletizer joined the military. Remember Rob? He was a Vietnam War vet. That didn’t stop your HA Libtardo buds from calling him names. KLake was a military man and we know the names everyone who didn’t enter the military on your side called KLake.

That’s because I have no problem using words like fascism and nazism when they actually apply.

And so the merry-go-round continues to spin. When we who think right aptly use the terms OMG how dare we. You see Darryl, Puddy doesn’t call old Jewish Retired Americans who show up at events acting like Brownshirts. Puddy has too much respect for the plight their forefathers went through in Germany by the same NAZI Brownshirts. That doesn’t stop your side and morons like Another TJ from using that term to describe them becausee he read it on TPM. Puddy hasn’t been to Rush’s site in a while but as soon as Puddy places information on this blog “it came from Limbaugh”. Puddy doesn’t need to peruse those sites when Puddy has RSS feeds from most major news orgs.

You side supports and loves morons like Hugo Chavez. You guys eat it up when Van Jones attacks Glenn Beck and say nuthin when Van Jones shows up as #46 9/11 Truther signatory. Or his whack-job thoughts. You head HA Libtardos use leftist whack-job sites to make insipid points all the time and when we who think right call you on it your side goes apoplectic.

Attacked? Slayed is more like it. So from your non-defense defense, I’ll infer that when you refer to the Messiah then your post is sacarstic and you don’t really mean it. (see @20)

Nice work. Facts get in the way? Just pretend you were joking.

BTW, your diatribe @22. The whole sub-section is about what a physician-owned and operated facility MUST DO TO BE EXEMPT from the financial reporting sections of the act. So, Mr. Can’t read more than half a page, a hospital or doctor can indeed expand and invest in any way they see fit IF they are willing to disclose all financial relationships. (See the concept of conflict of interest. If the physician is in a profit sharing relationship with the hospital, it is POSSIBLE that said doctor might steer patients toward more expensive but not necessarily more effective treatment.)

“So what Pelletizer joined the military. Remember Rob? He was a Vietnam War vet. That didn’t stop your HA Libtardo buds from calling him names. KLake was a military man and we know the names everyone who didn’t enter the military on your side called KLake.”

Hey…I’m not feigning outrage about you spitting on a Vietnam Vet. I just wanted clarification on your principles.

I think you are suggesting that you have no problem calling a Vet by an epithet that is, essentially, the enemy he was willing to die fighting against?

I don’t care about use of the words, per se. The problem I see coming from the right is the use of words where they don’t apply, i.e. misuse in contexts where they are pejorative but inaccurate. Using the words when they are accurate is fine, even if pejorative. My principle isn’t to avoid the words in all contexts, but rather to use them appropriately and be willing to debate the merits of the words used in such contexts.

“You see Darryl, Puddy doesn’t call old Jewish Retired Americans who show up at events acting like Brownshirts.”

I would certainly have no problems calling a group of people brownshirts for using such tactics to intimidate people and shut down a public meeting. Their employment status, religious or ethnic heritage and political affiliation is entirely irrelevant to me.

“Puddy has too much respect for the plight their forefathers went through in Germany by the same NAZI Brownshirts.”

Suit yourself. I prefer clarity of communicatinos over sacrosanctization of such words.

“That doesn’t stop your side and morons like Another TJ from using that term to describe them becausee he read it on TPM.”

I doubt his use of such words is “because he reads it on TPM.”

“Puddy hasn’t been to Rush’s site in a while but as soon as Puddy places information on this blog “it came from Limbaugh”. Puddy doesn’t need to peruse those sites when Puddy has RSS feeds from most major news orgs.”

I’m not really sure how this is related to the earlier discussion.

“You side supports and loves morons like Hugo Chavez.”

What the fuck????? Do you REALLY believe a majority of folks on “my side” gives a flying fuck about Chavez one way or the other? Puddy, are you engaging in intellectual honesty by making such a statement?

I didn’t know that Van Jones attacked Glenn Beck, but I have no problems with anybody offering honest criticism of anybody. It is entirely irrelevant to me whether they signed an unrelated petition.

“You head HA Libtardos use leftist whack-job sites to make insipid points all the time…”

So? This is a liberal blog, so you should naturally expect a higher proportion of references to other liberal sources here.

But your obsession with sources is strange to me. I have no issues using any source. For example, I’ve frequently used Fox News and Real Clear Politics as an information source. When I read any media source reporting news (rather than opinion), regardless of political leaning, I evaluate it for quality: objectivity, factual accuracy, proper sourcing, etc. If it passes the quality test, I’ll use it. FOX news does fine basic reporting on many topics.

Your penchant to label media sources as good or bad seems childishly naive to me.

“and when we who think right call you on it your side goes apoplectic. Funny how that happens.”

Sound to me like you (1) misunderstand the nature and purpose of this blog, and (2) don’t understand much about evaluating media sources.

How interesting Darryl is. He’s concerned about my principles while he gives a free pass on the principles all other leftists. Puddy won’t start on Darryl’s principles because the previous sentence is enough evidence.

I don’t care about use of the words, per se. The problem I see coming from the right is the use of words where they don’t apply, i.e. misuse in contexts where they are pejorative but inaccurate. Using the words when they are accurate is fine, even if pejorative. My principle isn’t to avoid the words in all contexts, but rather to use them appropriately and be willing to debate the merits of the words used in such contexts.

———–

When you get up a head of steam, Darryl, you are one heck of a blowhard, I’ll give you that. Are you being paid by the word for this blather, or did you pull it out of one of your lectures?

So which of the hateful death pastors does the famous christian conservatve puddybitch think is the most godly. They ALL want doctors who provide reproductive services to women to die (the puddybitch doesn’t seem to have a problem with killing abortion doctors), and now nationally known and recognized leaders of major conservative christian congregations are calling for prayer initiatives to urge their “god” to cause the illness and death of Barack Obama by cancer…like “god” killed Ted Kennedy.

All I’m asking, because I’m curious, is that the puddybitch state clearly whether he agrees or disagrees with these clerical leaders of his (he admits to being a conservative evangelical christian) brand of religionism.

So far the queestion has been ignored. The subject changed, the questioner vilified…all the usual tools right-wingnut world tool box.

I just think it’s telling. These death pastors are white. the puddybitch is black. The president they all semm to hate so much is a man of color the very first to hold this nations highest office, and to all indications a sober, moderate, well-intentioned family man who sincerely wants to make this country a better place for all. Putting aside the lunacy of wishing the death of this country’s most prominent elected official, why would these persons who puport to love the guidance of the christ, the “prince of peace”…why would they be advocating and trying to bring about the premature death of ANYONE? Didn’t the christ number among his inner circle prostitutes, tax collectors and neer-do-well fishermen.

Kudos to Nancy Pelosi and the House Dems for standing up to the unrelenting pressure of the for-profit health care and health insurance monopolies.

It is madness that basic healthcare is a for-profit enterprise. It is immoral that sick and dying people…humans suffering from illness and physical trauma are forces to bankrupt themselves so that a thousand executives can make an exhorbitant salary and/or bonus.

@63 Re your link, that guy gives ONE example of a photo of a “Kill Bush” sign. I did an internet search to find the original source of that photo, and here’s what I came up with:

“(Source: I found this image several years ago in an online report about an anti-war protest, but I unfortunately failed to note down where or when the protest happened, and the Web site that originally hosted the report is now defunct.)”

So — the photo is several years old; the web site that originally posted it to the internet is defunct; and the source your source got it from doesn’t know when or where the protest happened. It could have been in Italy or France, for all we know. Looking at the photo, you can’t even tell if it’s at a protest at all.

Great work, puddlehead! It’s up to your usual standards of attribution and reliability.

Kudos to Nancy Pelosi and the House Dems for standing up to the unrelenting pressure of the for-profit health care and health insurance monopolies.

———-

And shame on them for not speaking out on Afghanistan when so many Democrats have turned against a war that is killing our sons and daughters, draining our treasury, and killing more innocent people every day.

I see you’ve been too distracted to notice your evidence is whack? So I’ll move on. Why would anyone who didn’t attend Dr. Wright’s church denounce him? Me, I’d never heard of the man before the campaign. Don’t follow him. Not a member of the administration and by his own admission, not in any position of influence. So why should I care, or even think, about him. Why denounce someone with whom you have no affiliation. Logical failure, Puddy.

I heard that Kim Jong Il is a bad dude. I denounce him publicly. I’ll bet it hurts his feelings.

My butcher once gave me some spoiled meat and when I complained he called me a Nazi. Puddy I DEMAND you denounce my butcher! (Silly isn’t it.)

But if it keeps you distracted from you ingnorance (or was it outright lying) about a proposed health care bill…

I see you’ve been too distracted to notice your evidence is whack? So I’ll move on. Why would anyone who didn’t attend Dr. Wright’s church denounce him?

Exactly fool. You finally get it to a point. Puddy doesn’t attend these pastors churches, butt that’s lost on you moron! You agree with the clusterfucked cinderblock that Puddy needs to denounce someone Puddy has never met, seen or heard. Proves just how ignorant you are checksaid.

Are you having another Mike Rogers moment?

More logical failure checksaid? Keeping your head in the sewer checksaid? Being distracted by the “pithy” commentary of clusterfucked cinderblock?

Please Donate

I appreciate feeling appreciated. Also, money.

Currency:

Amount:

Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?

Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!

Search HA

Follow Goldy

HA Commenting Policy

It may be hard to believe from the vile nature of the threads, but yes, we have a commenting policy. Comments containing libel, copyright violations, spam, blatant sock puppetry, and deliberate off-topic trolling are all strictly prohibited, and may be deleted on an entirely arbitrary, sporadic, and selective basis. And repeat offenders may be banned! This is my blog. Life isn’t fair.